Lebanon: Who's to Blame?

Two crucial questions on Israel versus its enemies.

When puzzling out the rights and wrongs of the Middle East conflict, it's helpful to pose two questions. Question one: If Israel stopped attacking Hezbollah, would Hezbollah stop attacking Israel?

The clear answer is no. Hezbollah rockets attacks and cross-border guerrilla raids had been going on for years before the current hostilities broke out, and they would certainly start up again sooner or later even if Israel ceased firing and swore never to venture into Lebanon again. The last time Israel pulled back, when it ended its 18 year occupation of southern Lebanon in 2000, Hezbollah hailed it as a great victory, rushed to rearm and started to strike across the border at Israelis.

Question two turns things around. If Hezbollah stopped attacking Israel, would Israel stop attacking Hezbollah? Just as clearly, the answer is yes. If Lebanon ever managed to do what the United Nations has demanded and took control of the south away from Hezbollah, neutralizing it as a threat to Israel, the Israelis would have no motive for any kind of military action in Lebanon. Israel has no quarrel with its neighbor to the north: no claim on its territory, no animus against its people. It simply objects to seeing southern Lebanon turned into a launching pad for attacks on Israeli citizens by a militant group that swears to seek its destruction.

Were Hezbollah to proclaim tomorrow that it was giving up its armed struggle against Israel, this conflict would be over. Were Israel to say, on the other hand, that it was giving up its fight against Hezbollah and withdrawing all its forces from the border zone, the conflict would surely continue as an emboldened Hezbollah pressed home its victory.

This little exercise of the two questions may help sort out who is really to blame in this conflict. Hezbollah says it is firing rockets at Israeli population centers in answer to all Israeli "aggression" against Lebanon. No. Oxford defines aggression as "the actor of practice of attacking without provocation esp. beginning a quarrel or war." That is exactly what Hezbollah did when it crossed the UN-certified border into Israel, kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and killed eight others, setting off the current fighting. Israel did nothing to deserve that attack except (in Hezbollah's eyes) for being Israel. Israel's counterattack wasn't aggression; it was simple self-defense. When Hezbollah cries "aggression," it is like a thug who chucks a brick at a cop and then yells "police brutality" when the cop whacks him with a baton. It's the oldest trick in the revolutionary handbook, and the world should be able to see through it by now.

The idea that Hezbollah is somehow defending Lebanon's national sovereignty forma an imperialistic Israel would be laughable if it were not so widely believed in the Arab world. It is Hezbollah itself that has diluted the sovereign power of the Lebanese government by setting itself up in southern Lebanon as a militant state within a state beyond the power of Beirut. And it is Hezbollah that has put Lebanon's sovereignty at risk by attacking Israel and hijacking the country's foreign policy.

But wait, Israel's critics will say. Hezbollah had a good reason for attacking Israel's ongoing occupation of Arab land. Every people has the right to resist a foreign occupier and Hezbollah was simply exercising that right when it went on the attack.

That argument might have carried water at one time. Not any more. Far from swallowing up the Arab land, Israel is pulling back. It pulled out of Lebanon six years ago. It pulled out of Gaza a year back. Its current government won election in March on a pledge to leave most of the West Bank too -- a withdrawal that might leave some territorial disputes in its wake, but would represent a substantial move all the same. Apart from the Golan Heights, there is no other Arab land occupied by Israel, and successive Israeli governments have indicated they would support some form of withdrawal even from the strategic Golan in return for reliable peace agreement with Syria and a deal on demilitarizing the heights.

If the Arab world came to accept the existence of a Jewish state in its midst, there would be no reason for Israel to employ its armed might against its neighbors

Yet Israel's enemies keep on attacking. They attacked after Israel signed the Oslo accords that let Yasser Arafat and his Palestine Liberation Organization set up shops in the West Bank and Gaza in the 1990's. They attacked after Prime Minister Ehud Barak sketched out the most sweeping concessions to Palestinians from any Israeli government in the Camp David talks or 2000. They attacked when Israel made its boldest territorial concession by withdrawing from Gaza -- packing up all its settlers, withdrawing all its soldiers and handing the whole place over to the Palestinian to govern as they wished (only to find Israel being bombarded by rockets based in Gaza). And now they attack from southern Lebanon, which was handed over in its entirety in 2000, and held until then only as a defensive buffer.

Is it any wonder Israelis feel beleaguered? Is it any wonder they took so long to accept turning over the West Bank and Gaza to Palestinians, considering the threat it might pose to their security? If these relentless attacks stopped, if the Arab world came to accept the existence of a Jewish state in its midst, there would be no reason on Earth for Israel to employ its armed might against its neighbors as it is doing now with such devastating effect.

Which brings us back to those two basic questions. If Israel's enemies stopped attacking Israel, would Israel stop attacking them? Certainly. If Israel stopped attacking its enemies, would they stop attacking Israel? Sadly not; at least not yet. And that is why the Arab-Israeli dispute drags on.

Related Articles:

Visitor Comments: 22

(21)
Prof. P. Hatgil,
August 25, 2006 12:00 AM

Peace in the Middle East

Why doesn't Israel return the Golan Heights and "The Farm" to Lebanon and agree to a artwo State solution with the Palestinians. Thousands of Palestinians cannot return to their homes. Thousands moare are kept in terrible-condition camps deprived of a trial. the detainees include hundreds of children and women. Let us for a change refrain from always being the victim and extend a welcome hand. These actions would reflect Israel's ernest desire for peace.

Ellen,
February 3, 2014 1:02 AM

Hey Prof, still think Israel should return the Golan Heights?

Still think its all the Israelis' fault? Go live in Syria and check it out!

(20)
Marni Rosen,
August 21, 2006 12:00 AM

Amazing

As a former resident of Canada (now living in Israel) I am amazed that the Globe and Mail wrote such an open-minded article that did not condemn Israel for what happened in the most recent war. When we lived in Canada, we stopped reading The Globe and Mail because it was so blatantly anti-Israel it was sickening. It is a pleasant surprise to see this change. Also Prime Minister Harper of Canada stated Israel has the right to defend itself. Not actually a remarkable statement but still an improvement over former Islam-loving, anti-Israel Canadian government leaders. Maybe Prime Minister Harper feels this way as his own life was threatened by Islamic terrorists. They planned not only to kill him but to decapitate him. Which says a lot about the kind of people they are. Yet the world expects us to "make peace" with such blood-thirsty, death-loving terrorists. When is the world going to wake up? It is not only Jews and Israel they hate but all non-Moslems. At least the Globe article indicates a dawning of reality.

(19)
Edward,
August 20, 2006 12:00 AM

I enjoy the articles and the true facts reported.

It seems almost almost sence the very beginning of time you (the Jewish People) have been the hunted.Ther is only one for the hunted to win and that, is to become the hunter. The hunted must be the hunter. Perhaps my comments don,t belong here and if they offend I am sorry.I was a soldier for over (20) years (INF)and I think I know LITTLE ABOUT WAR.I belive this is not over till you take them down, if that means sending them all to hell....so be it.Hang in there Israel...this old has been GI is behind you all the way!

(18)
Thomas Sebastian,
August 18, 2006 12:00 AM

Building Trust Is Essential

Dear Madam/Sir Future of Middle East hangs on true trust between Israel and Israel brotherly neighbours And more than Israel it is the neighbours who have to reinforce this needed trust For history evinces that all attempts to establish normal relations have been spoiled by only a few arragant fanatics wearing muslim or Arab mask It is high time we isolate them and let Muslims and Arabs and Israelis lead a normal and quiet life

(17)
yigal greenberger,
August 17, 2006 12:00 AM

waitig for more

great way for an israeli living overseas to get wonderfull information from our litlle country...thanks

(16)
Alex,
August 17, 2006 12:00 AM

This war must be finished but not left the way it was.It is clear to me that Israel lost this very first time.Or may be there is something we do not now et... .

(15)
steve,
August 17, 2006 12:00 AM

life is more complex then just two questions, especially poletics.

How about this for two questions: 1. What is Hezbolla's reason of existance? 2. If Palestinians wouldn't be constantly killed, captured, opressed and would Hezbollah still attack?

(14)
Andrew Green,
August 16, 2006 12:00 AM

What are Israel's objectives here?

Ethics aside what are Israel's objectives here? You ask the ethical question who's to blame? Well Israeli soldiers according to my knowledge were actually in Leb terroritory. Israel has captured and imprisoned 1000s of Lebanese, are all of these captives justifiable? So whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Also is shelling Lebanese civilians and killing 300 a proportional response?Israel must ask itself the following questions:1. Will Hezzbollah become more popular or less popular in Lebanon after its recent actions? And will this vastly increase membership of Hezzbollah? 2. Will attacks on Israel who are perceived as an oppressor who have just killed 300civilians more or less acceptable to the Lebanese public now?3. What has Israel achieved through this show of force?Israel? 1. Either invade and occupy Southern lebanon turning it into a police state and destroying Hezzbollah leadership from the inside. This will cause uprisings and long term hate but may eliminate the problem. If your going to do a job do it properly.2. Withdrawing forced, negotiating, don't attack without provocation, don't attack disproportionately, try a bit harder not to target civilians, set up a joint policing system with Lebanon, try to back more liberal hezbollah politicians (Hezzbollah are here to stay now so back the Hezzbollah who don't want to destroy ISrael).

(13)
David,
August 16, 2006 12:00 AM

To respond to KC

Look with all do respect, you have a great point but think about this, the Lebanese people know what they are doing by taking the offerings of Hezbollah, weather it be food, money, cloths, or what ever. So to say, air raids are a questionable decision because it has damaged bridges…., is infact a bit too extreme. After all don’t you think by now Israel has lost all patients after the relentless attacks, even after them doing the right thing and backing out of here and backing out of there? I mean the Israeli people have given up everything to say in instances where they moved out of Gaza. And again, Hezbollah utilizes these roads, bridges, and, airports. Maybe not the apartments but still you never really know. And I believe with being constantly bombed and raided, watching time after time of your own innocent people dieing by the actions of a group that has no real objective other than to take what they can, is very irritating. (Understatement) But other than that you have great points and well said if I may add. Also, why would the Israeli people apologize to a country that is housing a terrorist? I mean the Israeli forces have given time for innocent people to evacuate the area, trust me on that.

(12)
KC,
August 16, 2006 12:00 AM

I totally approve with ALL your point of view... But... (continued)

Unfortunately there was a swinging between the two options; At first deciding to go all out with intense air raids all over Lebanon, which unfortunately created substantial collateral damage on civilian targets and infrastructure which often have nothing to do with Hezbollah fighters, like apartment complexes, bridges, oil tanks, airports, etc... sometimes caused by intelligence mistakes, other times because of Hezbollah guerilla tactics of blending in the population, and finally sometimes because of Israeli tactics of wanting to cut off all the roads and means that could potentially be used to re-supply Hezbollah or allow them to move with ease; The problem is that most Lebanese will not understand these justifications, and will not want to hear Israel’s apologies... And the main goal, disarming or weakening Hezbollah “substantially”, was (unfortunately) not achieved... I personally fear that Hezbollah will actually be re-enforced in popularity by this war...

(11)
KC,
August 16, 2006 12:00 AM

I totally approve with ALL your point of view... But... (part 1)

I would like to point out another double question to think about; Actually it is more of a dilemma which the Olmert government faced: “Should we go all out with the air force on all of Lebanese soil, at the risk of re-enforcing Hezbollah’s position in Lebanon if -God forbid- we failed, but with the goal of ‘substantially weakening’ Hezbollah?” Or “should we attack Hezbollah with moderation, just by responding in the south and on the ground to terminate their direct threat, even though it will cost a lot in matters of Israeli military lives and equipment, and not solve the problem of the weapons of Hezbollah?” It is quite a dilemma indeed...

(10)
Jules,
August 16, 2006 12:00 AM

Did they say the end is near or here?

We are outnumbered by Arabs. Their aggression against Israel and Jews grows every day, and, we, the stupid, gullible Jews, that only want to live quietly and peacefully try again and again to compromise with them.THERE IS NO SOLUTION BUT BEING WITH TE UPPER HAND.They will never stop. They will hate us forever. They will take advantage of any situation they’ll get to attack us. Thus retrieving from occupied land is a mistake! It’s a sign of weakness. Only another opportunity for them to attack us.Syria and Iran don’t hide the fact that their mission is to destroy Israel, and yet, Israel is somehow gets publicly condemned for the war and the death of citizens that were protecting the Hezbollah terrorists! Have no doubt, those citizens were warned to leave the area.This humiliating ending for the war, is another way of saying ‘please come and attack us again, ‘cause as you can see, we can’t do nothing about it because we can’t attack you due to a possibility of world criticism’.The IDF can win! He can wipe Lebanon, Syria and Iran all together. But we, they and everyone else in the world know that Israel won’t do it, because unlike Lebanon, Syria and Iran, Israel has morals for human lives, her soldiers and world peace.But, mostly we’re na?ve. They will attack us sooner or later and when they will, it would be like WWII- we will die, no one will care but only when it’ll get personal with the USA, Bush will have the dignity to return from Texas.There are only 6 million Jews in Israel now…

(9)
char,
August 14, 2006 12:00 AM

The Blame Game of Hezbollah

This article gets right to the core of the enemies' perspective. This is not only Israel's problem but a problem for every non-muslim which comes down to an ultimatum: Submit or else. To submit is certain death, not only the body but also the soul. We cannot submit to their religion under any circumstance.

(8)
Allan Carty,
August 14, 2006 12:00 AM

Yes.

It is absolutely correct to assume Israels enemies would keep on attacking.Israels enemies are committed to it's destruction. 'nuff said.

Very good articles, they do convey the truth and nothing but the truth, they also show the world the high standards of the Jewish faith. Keep up the good work!

(6)
thomas mcdade,
August 14, 2006 12:00 AM

i enjoy reading the articles in on your web page.

(5)
Ora,
August 14, 2006 12:00 AM

nice for a newspaper, not a Torah site

This article explains the situation from a non-Jewish perspective, which is fine for a newspaper. But does any article which refers to Yehuda, the Shomron, and the Golan heights as "occupied Arab lands" really have a place on a Torah website? Also, I find the underlying assumption that such "occupation" would in fact justify terrorism such as that of the Hizbollah disturbing at best. The slaughter of innocents is never justified, even if one believes that Israel steals land.

(4)
Anonymous,
August 13, 2006 12:00 AM

no justice

remember this is the best best time to make real peace... when israel is strongnot after it gets nuked...

(3)
I,
August 13, 2006 12:00 AM

Not yet time for peace

Unfortunately, Hezbollah feels that it has won this mini-war, and Israel has shown its weakness. To the Arabs this is the time to become even more aggressive, when Israel is weak. All of the terrorist groups and their national enablers have one goal, which they are not hesitant to constantly state aloud: Israel and the Jews must be completely destroyed. No, we are far from having the conditions for real peace, as opposed to the Muslim pseudo-peace, which is only a pretense for preparing for the next attack.

(2)
Charley G,
August 13, 2006 12:00 AM

excellent reporting

keep up good factual reporting

(1)
Steffen Lauge Pedersen,
August 13, 2006 12:00 AM

The "softies" is the worst threat

The-peace-at any-prize people are the real war mongers. I remember the day, when Neville Cham-berlain came back from his talks with Hitler in München in '38. "Peace in our time", cried my gentle school-teacher, the tears streaming down her face. face.

I just got married and have an important question: Can we eat rice on Passover? My wife grew up eating it, and I did not. Is this just a matter of family tradition?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

The Torah instructs a Jew not to eat (or even possess) chametz all seven days of Passover (Exodus 13:3). "Chametz" is defined as any of the five grains (wheat, spelt, barley, oats, and rye) that came into contact with water for more than 18 minutes. Chametz is a serious Torah prohibition, and for that reason we take extra protective measures on Passover to prevent any mistakes.

Hence the category of food called "kitniyot" (sometimes referred to generically as "legumes"). This includes rice, corn, soy beans, string beans, peas, lentils, peanuts, mustard, sesame seeds and poppy seeds. Even though kitniyot cannot technically become chametz, Ashkenazi Jews do not eat them on Passover. Why?

Products of kitniyot often appear like chametz products. For example, it can be hard to distinguish between rice flour (kitniyot) and wheat flour (chametz). Also, chametz grains may become inadvertently mixed together with kitniyot. Therefore, to prevent confusion, all kitniyot were prohibited.

In Jewish law, there is one important distinction between chametz and kitniyot. During Passover, it is forbidden to even have chametz in one's possession (hence the custom of "selling chametz"). Whereas it is permitted to own kitniyot during Passover and even to use it - not for eating - but for things like baby powder which contains cornstarch. Similarly, someone who is sick is allowed to take medicine containing kitniyot.

What about derivatives of kitniyot - e.g. corn oil, peanut oil, etc? This is a difference of opinion. Many will use kitniyot-based oils on Passover, while others are strict and only use olive or walnut oil.

Finally, there is one product called "quinoa" (pronounced "ken-wah" or "kin-o-ah") that is permitted on Passover even for Ashkenazim. Although it resembles a grain, it is technically a grass, and was never included in the prohibition against kitniyot. It is prepared like rice and has a very high protein content. (It's excellent in "cholent" stew!) In the United States and elsewhere, mainstream kosher supervision agencies certify it "Kosher for Passover" -- look for the label.

Interestingly, the Sefardi Jewish community does not have a prohibition against kitniyot. This creates the strange situation, for example, where one family could be eating rice on Passover - when their neighbors will not. So am I going to guess here that you are Ashkenazi and your wife is Sefardi. Am I right?

Yahrtzeit of Rabbi Moses ben Nachman (1194-1270), known as Nachmanides, and by the acronym of his name, Ramban. Born in Spain, he was a physician by trade, but was best-known for authoring brilliant commentaries on the Bible, Talmud, and philosophy. In 1263, King James of Spain authorized a disputation (religious debate) between Nachmanides and a Jewish convert to Christianity, Pablo Christiani. Nachmanides reluctantly agreed to take part, only after being assured by the king that he would have full freedom of expression. Nachmanides won the debate, which earned the king's respect and a prize of 300 gold coins. But this incensed the Church: Nachmanides was charged with blasphemy and he was forced to flee Spain. So at age 72, Nachmanides moved to Jerusalem. He was struck by the desolation in the Holy City -- there were so few Jews that he could not even find a minyan to pray. Nachmanides immediately set about rebuilding the Jewish community. The Ramban Synagogue stands today in Jerusalem's Old City, a living testimony to his efforts.

It's easy to be intimidated by mean people. See through their mask. Underneath is an insecure and unhappy person. They are alienated from others because they are alienated from themselves.

Have compassion for them. Not pity, not condemning, not fear, but compassion. Feel for their suffering. Identify with their core humanity. You might be able to influence them for the good. You might not. Either way your compassion frees you from their destructiveness. And if you would like to help them change, compassion gives you a chance to succeed.

It is the nature of a person to be influenced by his fellows and comrades (Rambam, Hil. De'os 6:1).

We can never escape the influence of our environment. Our life-style impacts upon us and, as if by osmosis, penetrates our skin and becomes part of us.

Our environment today is thoroughly computerized. Computer intelligence is no longer a science-fiction fantasy, but an everyday occurrence. Some computers can even carry out complete interviews. The computer asks questions, receives answers, interprets these answers, and uses its newly acquired information to ask new questions.

Still, while computers may be able to think, they cannot feel. The uniqueness of human beings is therefore no longer in their intellect, but in their emotions.

We must be extremely careful not to allow ourselves to become human computers that are devoid of feelings. Our culture is in danger of losing this essential aspect of humanity, remaining only with intellect. Because we communicate so much with unfeeling computers, we are in danger of becoming disconnected from our own feelings and oblivious to the feelings of others.

As we check in at our jobs, and the computer on our desk greets us with, "Good morning, Mr. Smith. Today is Wednesday, and here is the agenda for today," let us remember that this machine may indeed be brilliant, but it cannot laugh or cry. It cannot be happy if we succeed, or sad if we fail.

Today I shall...

try to remain a human being in every way - by keeping in touch with my own feelings and being sensitive to the feelings of others.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...